A Los Angeles judge has dissolved a temporary restraining order and denied Olivier Martinez’s request for a domestic violence restraining order involving his and Halle Berry’s son, Maceo. Judge Shelley Kaufman made the ruling on October 29, ending the temporary order at issue while the former couple’s broader custody matter continues.
Berry denied the abuse allegations connected to the request. Her attorney, Marina Beck, said the legal team was pleased by the court’s decision and said Berry would continue focusing on what is best for her family as the case proceeds. An attorney for Martinez had not immediately provided a response.
The ruling is an important procedural development, but it does not mean every element of the former couple’s family-law dispute has been concluded. The custody arrangement that had been in effect under the temporary order will remain in place pending a further hearing. In practical terms, that distinction matters: the court rejected the requested domestic violence restraining order and dissolved the temporary order, while the parents’ ongoing arrangements concerning their child remain subject to the legal process.
What the ruling does — and does not — resolve
A temporary restraining order, often shortened to TRO, is a short-term court order used while a court considers whether a longer-lasting order is warranted. A request for a domestic violence restraining order is a request for court-ordered protections under a domestic-violence framework. Here, the court dissolved the temporary order and denied Martinez’s request for that longer order.
That outcome should not be read as a complete resolution of every disagreement between Berry and Martinez. The available details indicate that the custody arrangement remains operative until another hearing, and that the dispute sits within a much longer history of negotiations over parenting and financial terms after the end of their marriage.
It is also important not to add conclusions that the ruling itself does not establish. Berry denied the allegations, and the court denied the requested order. Beyond those reported developments, the available account does not set out the evidence presented, the court’s detailed reasoning, or the issues that may be addressed at the next hearing.
A long-running co-parenting arrangement
Berry and Martinez married in July 2013 and separated in October 2015. They became legally single in 2016, though questions surrounding finances and custody remained unresolved at that point. Their later agreement in August 2023 addressed both subjects.
Under that settlement, Berry and Martinez were granted both legal and physical custody of Maceo. Those terms contemplated parenting time during the week as well as alternating weekends. Legal custody generally concerns a parent’s authority to participate in major decisions affecting a child, while physical custody concerns the child’s living and parenting-time schedule. The reported agreement gave both parents roles in each category.
Related coverage includes Halle Berry Prevails as Court Dissolves Temporary Order Sought by Olivier Martinez.
The financial terms were detailed as well. Berry was ordered to pay Martinez $8,000 per month in child support, plus 4.3 percent of income earned above $2 million. She was also responsible for Maceo’s tuition, extracurricular expenses, and health insurance.
Those specifics provide context for why a new request and the court’s subsequent ruling do not exist in isolation. The parents had already reached a formal custody-and-support arrangement, but a formal agreement does not necessarily eliminate future conflicts over how co-parenting functions day to day.
Prior plan called for professional co-parenting support
By May 2024, Berry and Martinez had agreed to use professional help for their co-parenting disputes. A filing outlined a plan involving a psychiatrist who worked with both adults and children.
The process called for separate meetings between each parent and the doctor before at least six joint sessions. Those shared sessions were to be completed by June 14, 2024. If the arrangement proved beneficial, the parents could continue meeting jointly for as long as a year.
The doctor was to determine the format, length, and frequency of the sessions. Berry’s partner, Van Hunt, was permitted to participate under the terms of that agreement.
That arrangement is distinct from the restraining-order request, but it underscores that the parents had previously sought a structured route for addressing conflict. Co-parenting support can involve facilitated communication and conversations about practical family issues. The reported plan does not, by itself, reveal the content of those discussions or whether the sessions continued beyond the initially outlined period.
Why the remaining custody status matters
Headlines about a dissolved restraining order can suggest a clean ending, yet the current position is narrower. The court’s decision resolved the specific request for a domestic violence restraining order and ended the related temporary order. At the same time, the existing custody arrangement remains effective pending another hearing.
For the public, the clearest reading is to separate the two tracks. One track concerns the protective order request, which the judge denied. The other concerns the continuing custody process and the practical parenting arrangements for Maceo. The available information confirms that the latter remains active.
That careful distinction is especially relevant in celebrity family-law coverage, where a single court appearance can be framed as a sweeping victory or defeat even when subsequent proceedings are still expected. The court action is consequential for Berry and Martinez, but the reported facts do not indicate that all parenting-related issues between them have been permanently settled.
Separate family arrangements remain separate
Berry also shares daughter Nahla with former partner Gabriel Aubry. That is a separate co-parenting and support arrangement from the matter involving Martinez and Maceo. A prior reduction in the child support Berry pays Aubry concerned that separate family relationship, not the custody case addressed in the latest ruling.
Keeping those matters distinct is more than a technicality. The current ruling concerns Martinez’s request and the couple’s son; it does not alter or explain the legal arrangements involving Berry’s daughter and Aubry.
Berry’s public work remains part of the larger entertainment conversation as well. For more film-focused coverage, see Robert Pattinson’s comments on where Bruce Wayne’s psychology is headed in The Batman Part II.
What to watch next
The next significant development will be the further hearing referenced in the reported custody status. Until then, the key confirmed points are limited but clear: Kaufman dissolved the temporary order, denied the request for a domestic violence restraining order, Berry has denied the underlying abuse allegations, and the custody arrangement remains in effect while the matter moves forward.
Neither the denial of the request nor the continuation of the custody arrangement offers a complete public account of the former couple’s private disagreements. What it does show is that their established co-parenting framework remains relevant, even after the court declined to issue the restraining order Martinez sought.
